SCI 발표논문

SCI 발표논문

← SCI 발표논문 목록

Circulation. 2015;132(5):388-401.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention at Centers With and Without On-Site Surgical Backup: An Updated Meta-Analysis of 23 Studies.

, , , , ,

제1저자 이주명,황도연 · 교신저자 구본권

소속 (2)
  1. From Department of Internal Medicine and Cardiovascular Center, Seoul National University Hospital, Korea (J.M.L., D.H., J.P., K.-J.K., B.-K.K.); Division of Biostatistics, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD (C.A.); and Institute of Aging, Seoul National University, Korea (B.-K.K.).
  2. From Department of Internal Medicine and Cardiovascular Center, Seoul National University Hospital, Korea (J.M.L., D.H., J.P., K.-J.K., B.-K.K.); Division of Biostatistics, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD (C.A.); and Institute of Aging, Seoul National University, Korea (B.-K.K.). bkkoo@snu.ac.kr.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Emergency coronary artery bypass grafting for unsuccessful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is now rare. We aimed to evaluate the current safety and outcomes of primary PCI and nonprimary PCI at centers with and without on-site surgical backup.

METHODS AND RESULTS We performed an updated systematic review and meta-analysis by using mixed-effects models. We included 23 high-quality studies that compared clinical outcomes and complication rates of 1 101 123 patients after PCI at centers with or without on-site surgery. For primary PCI for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (133 574 patients), all-cause mortality (without on-site surgery versus with on-site surgery: observed rates, 4.8% versus 7.2%; pooled odds ratio [OR], 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.91-1.07; P=0.729; I(2)=3.4%) or emergency coronary artery bypass grafting rates (observed rates, 1.5% versus 2.4%; pooled OR, 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.56-1.01; P=0.062; I(2)=42.5%) did not differ by presence of on-site surgery. For nonprimary PCI (967 549 patients), all-cause mortality (observed rates, 1.6% versus 2.1%; pooled OR, 1.15; 95% confidence interval, 0.94-1.41; P=0.172; I(2)=67.5%) and emergency coronary artery bypass grafting rates (observed rates, 0.5% versus 0.8%; pooled OR, 1.14; 95% confidence interval, 0.62-2.13; P=0.669; I(2)=81.7%) were not significantly different. PCI complication rates (cardiogenic shock, stroke, aortic dissection, tamponade, recurrent infarction) also did not differ by on-site surgical capability. Cumulative meta-analysis of nonprimary PCI showed a temporal decrease of the effect size (OR) for all-cause mortality after 2007.

CONCLUSIONS Clinical outcomes and complication rates of PCI at centers without on-site surgery did not differ from those with on-site surgery, for both primary and nonprimary PCI. Temporal trends indicated improving clinical outcomes in nonprimary PCI at centers without on-site surgery.

© 2015 American Heart Association, Inc.

Keywords

STEMImeta-analysismortalityonsite coronary artery bypass graft (CABG)outcome assessment (health care)percutaneous coronary interventionthoracic surgery

Comment · 정정

그 밖의 정보
출판 형태
Comparative Study, Journal Article, Meta-Analysis, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't, Systematic Review
저널
Circulation · eISSN 1524-4539
전자 출판
2015-07-07
MeSH
Aged · Coronary Artery Disease / mortality / surgery · Female · Health Services Accessibility / statistics & numerical data · Humans · Incidence · Male · Middle Aged · Percutaneous Coronary Intervention / adverse effects / statistics & numerical data · Postoperative Complications / epidemiology · Surgicenters / statistics & numerical data · Survival Rate · Thoracic Surgery / statistics & numerical data · Treatment Outcome · United States